Please can we trade for LaRoche...

[Sports Guy]

So those who want LaRoche for Sherrill straight up:

What if LaRoche is on the DL more than he's on the field for the seasons he's under team control. Would it be worth losing Sherrill then?

LaRoche has been injury prone for the past two seasons, and the reason LA is fed up with him is most likely because he can't stay on the field.

There's a reason MacPhail wants two players for Sherrill, because one may not pan out and we can't afford to give up our best trading piece at the deadline for a guy who may or may not be the future at 3B, when we could potentially get a guy or guys that have a much more certain future.

MacPhail said he'll only make a deal if it improves the future of the club. You can't say that for certain about LaRoche because of his injuries. Now if we trade Bradford for LaRoche, then it's worth the risk.

What if Sherrill reverts back to a 4 ERA LOOGY that is making 3-6 million a year?

[cbm5042]

I hear what you are saying here, Jtrea, but you can't base everything off of what COULD happen. What if Sherrill gets hurt pitching tomorrow and is out for the season and possibly next?

Thats different because we're talking about trading for a guy with a history of injuries, not a "what if Sherrill gets hurt tomorrow" kind of deal.

[Sports Guy]

The Dodgers appear to be a team we may be able to take advantage of...We need to strike while the iron is hot...AM says nothing is close yet...Well get on the phone with LA and make it close.

[Peace21]

Last week on "The Show" with Kevin Kennedy and Rob Dibble on XM, Kennedy was talking about the possibilites of the Dodgers trying to bring back Beltre. He mentioned a deal of Laroche and McDonald would do it. Well now that they traded for Blake and those two prospects werent dealt, would you want those two for Sherrill?

[cbm5042]

Last week on "The Show" with Kevin Kennedy and Rob Dibble on XM, Kennedy was talking about the possibilites of the Dodgers trying to bring back Beltre. He mentioned a deal of Laroche and McDonald would do it. Well now that they traded for Blake and those two prospects werent dealt, would you want those two for Sherrill?

Still needs more seasoning to the package...

[JTrea81]

What if Sherrill reverts back to a 4 ERA LOOGY that is making 3-6 million a year?

I would say the risk of injury to LaRoche is greater than the chance that Sherrill reverts back to a LOOGY. And even if he did revert back to a LOOGY, his #'s wouldn't be that bad and he'd still be a shutdown guy vs. LHP.

LaRoche may turn into a David Segui or Nick Johnson. At least Sherrill would be helping the team.

[clapdiddy]

Last week on "The Show" with Kevin Kennedy and Rob Dibble on XM, Kennedy was talking about the possibilites of the Dodgers trying to bring back Beltre. He mentioned a deal of Laroche and McDonald would do it. Well now that they traded for Blake and those two prospects werent dealt, would you want those two for Sherrill?

Yup...I'd do that deal.

[66-70-83-??]

So those who want LaRoche for Sherrill straight up:

What if LaRoche is on the DL more than he's on the field for the seasons he's under team control. Would it be worth losing Sherrill then?

LaRoche has been injury prone for the past two seasons, and the reason LA is fed up with him is most likely because he can't stay on the field.

There's a reason MacPhail wants two players for Sherrill, because one may not pan out and we can't afford to give up our best trading piece at the deadline for a guy who may or may not be the future at 3B, when we could potentially get a guy or guys that have a much more certain future.

MacPhail said he'll only make a deal if it improves the future of the club. You can't say that for certain about LaRoche because of his injuries and the value that Sherrill has to the club and the trade value he has in general. Now if we trade Bradford for LaRoche, then it's worth the risk.

What IF?

What if Sherrill reverts to his numbers of pre-2007.

At the end of the day- SHerrill is a *good* LOOGY/ LH Relief pitcher.

Nothing more. And he is 31 yrs old. We aren't talking JOBA here.

If you can get one of the top young positional prospects in baseball for a middle reliever- you do it every time.

[66-70-83-??]

Last week on "The Show" with Kevin Kennedy and Rob Dibble on XM, Kennedy was talking about the possibilites of the Dodgers trying to bring back Beltre. He mentioned a deal of Laroche and McDonald would do it. Well now that they traded for Blake and those two prospects werent dealt, would you want those two for Sherrill?

LOL

Only on OH- now here come the posts..... Sherrill is worth as much or more than Beltre.

In 3....2...1.....

[mweb]

So those who want LaRoche for Sherrill straight up:

What if LaRoche is on the DL more than he's on the field for the seasons he's under team control. Would it be worth losing Sherrill then?

LaRoche has been injury prone for the past two seasons, and the reason LA is fed up with him is most likely because he can't stay on the field.

There's a reason MacPhail wants two players for Sherrill, because one may not pan out and we can't afford to give up our best trading piece at the deadline for a guy who may or may not be the future at 3B, when we could potentially get a guy or guys that have a much more certain future.

MacPhail said he'll only make a deal if it improves the future of the club. You can't say that for certain about LaRoche because of his injuries and the value that Sherrill has to the club and the trade value he has in general. Now if we trade Bradford for LaRoche, then it's worth the risk.

Yes, the durability is a concern, but I'd still trade a relief pitcher like Sherrill for a guy who can become an AS 3B, and is major league ready. Of course I'd prefer to get 2 players, but the question was if this was the best offer would you take it, and I would.

You can't say for sure if any players we get back for Sherrill will improve the future.

[TyCobb]

What if Sherrill reverts back to a 4 ERA LOOGY that is making 3-6 million a year?

Sherrill has always been able to get out lefties. I doubt he loses much value next season playing for us.

[JTrea81]

Yes, the durability is a concern, but I'd still trade a relief pitcher like Sherrill for a guy who can become an AS 3B, and is major league ready. Of course I'd prefer to get 2 players, but the question was if this was the best offer would you take it, and I would.

You can't say for sure if any players we get back for Sherrill will improve the future.

But there are ones that are potentially out there that have a more certain future than LaRoche. He's a high risk/high reward type of player. With so few premium trade pieces, we can't afford to miss...

[mweb]

LOL

Only on OH- now here come the posts..... Sherrill is worth as much or more than Beltre.

In 3....2...1.....

Yes, on the trade market, Sherill is worth more than Beltre. Huge difference in salary, Sherrill is playing better, and closers are overvalued.

[66-70-83-??]

But there are ones that are potentially out there that have a more certain future than LaRoche. He's a high risk/high reward type of player. With so few premium trade pieces, we can't afford to miss...

I don't even think we can get LaRoche straight up for Sherrill.

Who is better that is a) available, and b) obtained for what we can afford to trade (w/o giving up young pitching) ?

[Sports Guy]

I don't even think we can get LaRoche straight up for Sherrill.

Who is better that is a) available, and b) obtained for what we can afford to trade (w/o giving up young pitching) ?

I would bet a lot of money the Dodgers would deal Sherrill for LaRoche straight up.